Ranking Templates for Linear Loops

We present a new method for the constraint-based synthesis of termination arguments for linear loop programs based on linear ranking templates. Linear ranking templates are parametrized, well-founded relations such that an assignment to the parameters gives rise to a ranking function. This approach generalizes existing methods and enables us to use templates for many different ranking functions with affine-linear components. We discuss templates for multiphase, piecewise, and lexicographic ranking functions. Because these ranking templates require both strict and non-strict inequalities, we use Motzkin's Transposition Theorem instead of Farkas Lemma to transform the generated $\exists\forall$-constraint into an $\exists$-constraint.Comment: TACAS 201

Automated incremental software verification

Software continuously evolves to meet rapidly changing human needs. Each evolved transformation of a program is expected to preserve important correctness and security properties. Aiming to assure program correctness after a change, formal verification techniques, such as Software Model Checking, have recently benefited from fully automated solutions based on symbolic reasoning and abstraction. However, the majority of the state-of-the-art model checkers are designed that each new software version has to be verified from scratch. In this dissertation, we investigate the new Formal Incremental Verification (FIV) techniques that aim at making software analysis more efficient by reusing invested efforts between verification runs. In order to show that FIV can be built on the top of different verification techniques, we focus on three complementary approaches to automated formal verification. First, we contribute the FIV technique for SAT-based Bounded Model Checking developed to verify programs with (possibly recursive) functions with respect to the set of pre-defined assertions. We present the function-summarization framework based on Craig interpolation that allows extracting and reusing over- approximations of the function behaviors. We introduce the algorithm to revalidate the summaries of one program locally in order to prevent re-verification of another program from scratch. Second, we contribute the technique for simulation relation synthesis for loop-free programs that do not necessarily contain assertions. We introduce an SMT-based abstraction- refinement algorithm that proceeds by guessing a relation and checking whether it is a simulation relation. We present a novel algorithm for discovering simulations symbolically, by means of solving ∀∃-formulas and extracting witnessing Skolem relations. Third, we contribute the FIV technique for SMT-based Unbounded Model Checking developed to verify programs with (possibly nested) loops. We present an algorithm that automatically derives simulations between programs with different loop structures. The automatically synthesized simulation relation is then used to migrate the safe inductive invariants across the evolution boundaries. Finally, we contribute the implementation and evaluation of all our algorithmic contributions, and confirm that the state-of-the-art model checking tools can successfully be extended by the FIV capabilities

A Survey of Paraphrasing and Textual Entailment Methods

Paraphrasing methods recognize, generate, or extract phrases, sentences, or longer natural language expressions that convey almost the same information. Textual entailment methods, on the other hand, recognize, generate, or extract pairs of natural language expressions, such that a human who reads (and trusts) the first element of a pair would most likely infer that the other element is also true. Paraphrasing can be seen as bidirectional textual entailment and methods from the two areas are often similar. Both kinds of methods are useful, at least in principle, in a wide range of natural language processing applications, including question answering, summarization, text generation, and machine translation. We summarize key ideas from the two areas by considering in turn recognition, generation, and extraction methods, also pointing to prominent articles and resources.Comment: Technical Report, Natural Language Processing Group, Department of Informatics, Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece, 201

Rationalization for Explainable NLP: A Survey

Recent advances in deep learning have improved the performance of many Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks such as translation, question-answering, and text classification. However, this improvement comes at the expense of model explainability. Black-box models make it difficult to understand the internals of a system and the process it takes to arrive at an output. Numerical (LIME, Shapley) and visualization (saliency heatmap) explainability techniques are helpful; however, they are insufficient because they require specialized knowledge. These factors led rationalization to emerge as a more accessible explainable technique in NLP. Rationalization justifies a model's output by providing a natural language explanation (rationale). Recent improvements in natural language generation have made rationalization an attractive technique because it is intuitive, human-comprehensible, and accessible to non-technical users. Since rationalization is a relatively new field, it is disorganized. As the first survey, rationalization literature in NLP from 2007-2022 is analyzed. This survey presents available methods, explainable evaluations, code, and datasets used across various NLP tasks that use rationalization. Further, a new subfield in Explainable AI (XAI), namely, Rational AI (RAI), is introduced to advance the current state of rationalization. A discussion on observed insights, challenges, and future directions is provided to point to promising research opportunities

Computer Aided Verification

The open access two-volume set LNCS 11561 and 11562 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, CAV 2019, held in New York City, USA, in July 2019. The 52 full papers presented together with 13 tool papers and 2 case studies, were carefully reviewed and selected from 258 submissions. The papers were organized in the following topical sections: Part I: automata and timed systems; security and hyperproperties; synthesis; model checking; cyber-physical systems and machine learning; probabilistic systems, runtime techniques; dynamical, hybrid, and reactive systems; Part II: logics, decision procedures; and solvers; numerical programs; verification; distributed systems and networks; verification and invariants; and concurrency